浅谈田野考古动物遗存采集

田野考古动物遗存采集是动物考古学研究的关键环节之一,受人为控制,本文着重讨论了采集过程、采集方法和注意事项,旨在推进采集的规范化、科学性和完整度,为深入开展动物考古学研究提供良好的原始资料.     

Assembling an Anthropological Actor: Anthropological Assemblage and Colonial Government in Papua

This paper traces the networks through which particular practices of collecting cultures became imbricated in new relations governing colonial populations. It investigates the socio-technical arrangements associated with “practical anthropology” as they were enrolled in the Australian administered territory of Papua. The paper follows the assemblage of a new kind of anthropological actor: one which is framed in relation to new articulations of the administrative, academic and museum networks associated with a programme of “scientific administration” and the doctrine of “humanitarian colonialism”. In particular, it focuses on the office of the Government Anthropologist and the ways in which “native culture” emerged as an administrative surface.     

Photographic Uncertainties: Between Evidence and Reassurance

This paper examines the mid-nineteenth century photographic collecting practices in the Colonial Office (CO) in London. Following methodologies laid down by Stoler and Joyce, the paper excavates the epistemic procedures through which photography and its role in colonial governance operated between the late 1860s and 1875. I focus my analysis on the production of, and response to, two CO despatches, which were circulated in November 1869 requesting photographs. But what was the work expected of these photographs, what were they meant “to do”? What was their relationship with anthropology and geography? The paper argues that in the praxis of central government, the role of photographic evidence was more uncertain and confused than instrumental interpretative models have assumed. I shall argue that in many cases photographs were not “evidence” in any dynamic sense in information provision, but rather functioned as tools of reassurance.     

Rivet's Mission in Colonial Indochina (1931–1932) or the Failure to Create an Ethnographic Museum

By focusing on a transfer of a museological model from the Musée d'Ethnographie du Trocadéro to colonial Indochina, the paper examines the failure to create an ethnographic museum. The paper analyses, on the one hand, the collecting practices in the field and the circulation of knowledge, people, and objects from metropole to colony and vice versa. On the other hand, it seeks to highlight why Rivet and the École Française d'Extrême-Orient focused their research programme on the Montagnards from 1932 onwards at a time when French administration attempted to control the Highlands due to its strategic importance in terms of controlling Indochina. The concern with establishing ethnographic collections in Indochina extending from 1920s to 1938 attests the ways in which museums could be evolved in the governance of colonial populations. However, this concern underestimated the very fact that ethnographic museums differed for metropolitan populations and for colonizers.     

New Britain,new heritage: The consumption of a heritage culture

Abstract

Each month in Britain marks a further, official, distancing from the past and its memorials, as we move closer to the selected Millennium marker. Heritage has a particularly low profile at present with policies for destruction of the House of Lords encouraging increasing ridicule aimed at legacies from the past. In terms of media coverage, at least, the heritage bubble has burst, as indeed it had to. As soon as modest, individual or community, breaths were marshalled into corporate puff, the sheer size of the national preservation and presentation enterprise hinted at its own demise. Nicholas Howard, he of Castle Howard, provided an appropriate caution in 1993, when he noted:     

孙觉《春秋经解》四库本讹误考析

以四库本为代表的孙觉《春秋经解》“十三卷”本第一、二卷内容全部冒用自孙复《春秋尊王发微》第一、二卷,这是导致史籍记载该书卷数有“十三”、“十五”卷之差异的原因所在。此“十三卷”本的讹误应当出现在宋宁宗嘉定丙子年(1226)汪纲补修之后、王应麟《玉海》著录之前这一段时期内,可能是因该书残缺而为人“访合”的结果。该书(并其《提要》)被清廷四库全书处送交“聚珍处”的抄本当是纪昀家藏本,很可能“聚珍处”在校对刊印时发现了其中的错讹,遂删改、取用原《提要》而刊印了另外一种版本,这是聚珍本不同于四库本的原因所在。     

Introduction: Anthropology,Collecting and Colonial Governmentalities

This special issue contributes to an emerging literature on the materialities of colonial government by considering the changing relations between practices of data collecting, styles of anthropological knowing and modes of governing which target the conduct of colonial and metropolitan populations. Drawing on comparative studies from Australia; the Australian administered territory of Papua; France; French Indo-China; New Zealand; North America and the UK; the papers consider the implications of different forms of knowledge associated with practices of collecting—anthropology, archaeology, folklore studies, demography—in apparatuses of rule in various late nineteenth and early twentieth-century contexts. This introduction outlines the rationale for the volume and elaborates the concept of “anthropological assemblage” which helps focus the authors' explorations of the socio-technical agencements which connected museum, field, metropolis and colony during this period. In doing so, it points towards a series of broader themes—the relationship between pastoral power and ethnographic expertise; the Antipodean career of the Americanist culture concept; and the role of colonial centres of calculation in the circulation of knowledge, practices of collecting and regimes of governing—which suggest productive future lines of inquiry for “practical histories” of anthropology.     

Maisons Tropicales/Maisons Coloniales: contesting technologies of authenticity and value in Niamey,Brazzaville, Paris,New York and Venice

This article draws on multi-sited anthropological fieldwork to analyse institutional practices of producing cultural authenticity and value under conditions of globalization. It focuses on the ‘re-discovery’ of three so-called Maisons Tropicales as modern architectural heritage in Niamey and Brazzaville. These prototypes of a colonial building project were subsequently translocated, commoditized and displayed as modern works of art in Paris and New York. The article describes the global connections and disconnections between the actors involved, claiming that the alternative practices of appropriating the Maisons Tropicales rely on competing and conflicting technologies of authenticity and value. Adding to scholarship on exchanges of material culture, as well as on the production of cultural authenticity and value, the article reframes debates in heritage studies pertaining to the ethics of site-specificity, material integrity, and integrity of place; preservation, conservation, and restoration; restitution and repatriation; as well as questions of cultural identity and the notion of a ‘shared’ colonial heritage. Ultimately, the article re-contextualizes the Maisons Tropicales in their (post-)colonial legacies. It concludes that critical interjections by artists and ethnographers suggest potential to reassemble the dominant technologies of authenticity and value in the fields of art and heritage preservation.